Charlie Hebdo killers

Mr Malik

Free Member
Oct 26, 2014
10
3
41
Martyrs or killers ...?

We recently so the Devastating killing and murder of innocent people which is believed to be carried out by the 2 brothers.

So they claim this in the name of Islam and in the name of the Muslims.

But the truth is Islam teachings call these type of people killers.

But they twist the Quranic texts and islamic teaching to give their actions moral justification and acceptance.

But the truth is this is not Islam and this is not the actions of a Muslim....
 
  • Like
Reactions: John_G
It's not even a question. They are mere killers, of less importance than the dirt on their feet.
No respect should be given to people like this, and attention to their rantings and ravings must be limited in all ways possible. It must also become a role in the Muslim society in actively identifying these people to the authorities when they appear. I find it hard to believe no one else had any suspicions of their motives in their immediate circle. These people rarely ever act alone.
 
Upvote 0
There is a problem with this level of analysis. Decent Muslims - ie almost all of them - will condemn the murders but the majority - if not all - will also tell you that dishonouring the Prophet's name is a heinous crime. There was an otherwise 'normal' Muslim from a restaurant in High Wickham on the radio this morning explaining that he loved the Prophet more than his own children and those that draw cartoons of him get what they deserve.

The UK no longer has a blasphemy law but it seems that a large proportion of our population have different values.
 
Upvote 0
There is a problem with this level of analysis. Decent Muslims - ie almost all of them - will condemn the murders but the majority - if not all - will also tell you that dishonouring the Prophet's name is a heinous crime. There was an otherwise 'normal' Muslim from a restaurant in High Wickham on the radio this morning explaining that he loved the Prophet more than his own children and those that draw cartoons of him get what they deserve.

The UK no longer has a blasphemy law but it seems that a large proportion of our population have different values.

I completely agree, it is becoming clearer by the day that there is a level of insanity embedded within the teachings of the religion. This is not to say that most of the people who follow the religion are bad or insane, but that some of the key ideologies that they hold as a majority are completely insane and heavily outdated in the year 2015.

It cannot be acceptable in this day and age to continue to follow blindly the information in a book written in a time of humanity that held the most barbaric views on slavery, women, blasphemy... etc

And that is why I strongly believe that all Muslims no matter how peaceful they are, must denounce the clearly immoral rhetoric in their holy book. Much like many young new-age Christians are now doing. The vast majority of Christians I have met do not see the Bible as a literal guide to life, but as a collection of metaphorical stories with morals attached.

The most surprising thing about the Muslims that I meet is that you can tell that most of them know full well that many of the teachings and ideologies they believe are out-of-date in this day and age but are heavily conflicted and feel they must hold unto them blindly for fear of some holy or earthly repercussions if they don't. It is doubly disturbing when you consider the fact that many Muslims in Europe who described themselves as peaceful law-abiding citizens went on to publicly state their support for the ideology of ISIS but not the violence. These two things cannot be.
 
Upvote 0
The vast majority of Christians I have met do not see the Bible as a literal guide to life, but as a collection of metaphorical stories with morals attached.
This is utter tosh. If a Christian regards the Bible in the way you describe then they may as well deny the Christian faith all together. You can't pick and choose whcih bits you like and which you don't.
 
Upvote 0
Martyrs or killers ...?

We recently so the Devastating killing and murder of innocent people which is believed to be carried out by the 2 brothers.

So they claim this in the name of Islam and in the name of the Muslims.

But the truth is Islam teachings call these type of people killers.

But they twist the Quranic texts and islamic teaching to give their actions moral justification and acceptance.

But the truth is this is not Islam and this is not the actions of a Muslim....
Mr Malik. With all due respect to your faith, the Quran does not condemn the killings of non-Muslims or those Muslims who leave the faith. On the contrary the Quran endorses Jihad towards those who are not followers.
 
Upvote 0
With all due respect to your faith, the Quran does not condemn the killings of non-Muslims or those Muslims who leave the faith. On the contrary the Quran endorses Jihad towards those who are not followers.

A business forum is a ridiculous place to discuss the virtues of one religion or another; however if you must do it here, and if you claim to respect other faiths, you shouldn't so entirely misrepresent them. People who make false claims about against Islam are just as much the cause of current problems as the people distort it to incite violence.

A different belief system is not deemed a legitimate cause for violence or war under Islamic law. The Quran is categorical on this: "There shall be no compulsion in religion" (2:256); "Say to the disbelievers To you, your beliefs, to me, mine" (109:1-6)
 
Upvote 0
Decent Muslims - ie almost all of them - will condemn the murders but the majority - if not all - will also tell you that dishonouring the Prophet's name is a heinous crime.

Firstly the people who committed these murders are murderers. There is no justification for what they did.

However if we assume that your comment is accurate then I would suggest that people steer clear of insulting these people. An insult is in the eye of the receiver and if they state that it is henious then respect that. We can all agree that it is wrong but the result is a dozen or more dead people.

It's all very well saying that you should stand up to threats but once you go waving a red rag then these things will sometimes happen. The bottom line is that people died over something that was preventable and whatever anyone thinks there are families whose lifes have been destroyed over this. Both sides will say that they are in the right.

What does the satire benefit the world? It divides and can sometimes lead indirectly to needless death.


joesaccoonsatire1200.jpg
 
Upvote 0
A business forum is a ridiculous place to discuss the virtues of one religion or another; however if you must do it here, and if you claim to respect other faiths, you shouldn't so entirely misrepresent them. People who make false claims about against Islam are just as much the cause of current problems as the people distort it to incite violence.
I have not misrepresented or mocked other faiths. Merely to point out the scriptures laid out.
As for the forum being a ridiculous place to discuss the virtues of religion, there has been a long standing thread on here that has been running for many years on the issue.

The title of this section of the forum by the way is 'Time Out' which allows us to encompass all areas of life that are not business related. This has been a cause of some heated debate a year or so ago regarding the freedom of speech on certain topics.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Davek0974
Upvote 0
@ hedgie
(kicks off at about 1.34) sample: "I'm thinking of selling my daughter into slavery..." Exodus 21:7
@stockdam:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
-Martin Niemoller.
 
Upvote 0
This is utter tosh. If a Christian regards the Bible in the way you describe then they may as well deny the Christian faith all together. You can't pick and choose whcih bits you like and which you don't.

This bit of comedy gold from Hedgie highlights the op's problem, peoples interpretations of the holy books differ greatly because of how difficult they are to understand. The holy books themselves have been distorted to the extreme over the vast periods of time that these abrahamic religions have been in fashion which has led to intense division in the search for truth.

I don't doubt for one minute that those, now thankfully dead, terrorists considered themselves good muslims who were taking a more hands on approach to honoring their masterful creator. And i don't doubt for one minute that there will be hundreds of millions of muslims all over the world that sympathise with terrorists sentiments in some way or another.

But i agree that most muslims practice their faith in a more reasonable, less in your face manner.

But the more pressing issue here is that irrespective of religion, no human being on this earth should think it acceptable to take someones life over an opinion and society should always stand up to them, throw them in jail or kill them.

If i have any sympathy for terrorists, it's along the lines of how religion can corrupt what would have ordinarily been a reasonable state of mind.
 
Upvote 0
@stockdam
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

I'm really not sure what your point is. The only thing that "we" can do is to look at ourselves and ask if "we" could have prevented this awful set of terrorism. Well maybe not but poking fun is not a great idea. It's time we tried to understand what is going on and try to change what we are doing. There are now 20 plus innocent people dead and several terrorists; the terrorists will be followed by more, simply because their "comrades" were killed. Terrorists do not stand up and fight. They wait for easy targets. Condem all we want but until we address the root problem then it will continue.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Firstly the people who committed these murders are murderers. There is no justification for what they did.

However if we assume that your comment is accurate then I would suggest that people steer clear of insulting these people. An insult is in the eye of the receiver and if they state that it is henious then respect that. We can all agree that it is wrong but the result is a dozen or more dead people.

It's all very well saying that you should stand up to threats but once you go waving a red rag then these things will sometimes happen. The bottom line is that people died over something that was preventable and whatever anyone thinks there are families whose lifes have been destroyed over this. Both sides will say that they are in the right.

What does the satire benefit the world? It divides and can sometimes lead indirectly to needless death.

I agree and disagree. I wouldn't personally stick a picture of mohammed in my window (i live in Birmingham, i'd probably end up dead) but we can't allow individuals free reign to get offended over such stupidity as cartoons or in the future it will be troublesome. For the moment, while there is so much turbulence in the middle east, the common sense approach would be to tone down the piss taking but not forget our core values over the long term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Davek0974
Upvote 0
I agree and disagree. I wouldn't personally stick a picture of mohammed in my window (i live in Birmingham, i'd probably end up dead) but we can't allow individuals free reign to get offended over such stupidity as cartoons or in the future it will be troublesome. For the moment, while their is so much turbulence in the middle east, the common sense approach would be to tone down the piss taking but not forget our core values over the long term.

I agree that we should avoid insults even if we think the recipient should wise up. The fact is that they won't and the best approach is to avoid. That's not giving in but if "they" say it's insulting then it's insulting. No it won't stop the wave of terrorism but in the case of Charlie Hebdo they knew the risks but still continued. That to me is stupid. The world didn't take notice of what Charlie Hebdo published but now unfortunately they have more publiciity than they ever imagined but in the most tragic circumstances.
 
Upvote 0
The problem with the attack on Charlie Hebdo is that it wasn't a co-ordinated attack by an organisation, it was conducted by a handful of fanatics. It is almost impossible to prevent an attack like this.
 
Upvote 0
It's all very well saying that you should stand up to threats but once you go waving a red rag then these things will sometimes happen. The bottom line is that people died over something that was preventable and whatever anyone thinks there are families whose lifes have been destroyed over this. Both sides will say that they are in the right.

I generally agree. I'm afraid I've lost sight of the original reason that the cartoons were drawn - which were then republished by the French journalists. But, arguably the republishing of them was for a more significant and important cause than their original creation, in that they were making a real point about freedom of the press.

But it would have been better for them to have never been drawn in the first place. There are cleverer ways of making a point without doing something that could be predicted to give religionist nutters an excuse to murder whilst only getting equivocal support from the majority of even Western muslims whose beliefs have been unecessarily offended.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hedgie
Upvote 0
@ stockdam. I am surprised you didn't understand the meaning behind the (famous) Niemoller quote.
Basically it is asking where do you draw the line? Do you stop saying things that might offend murderous maniacs? Do you join their religion and submit to sharia law because they might kill you otherwise? Do you ignore the whole civilization of the Enlightenment because some medieval murderers, inspired by one religion, threaten to kill you if you don't?
Where do you draw the line?
Because if you give in to one demand you can be sure it won't stop there, it never does.
You say we need to address the root problem. What, in your view, is this root problem, and how should it be addressed, other than by appeasement?
 
Upvote 0
@ stockdam. I am surprised you didn't understand the meaning behind the (famous) Niemoller quote.
Basically it is asking where do you draw the line?

OK so you like quotes:

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

Charlie Hebdo posting "insults" to people they don't agree with will not change the world. As you said there is a line to be drawn but "freedom of the press" is not a way of drawing the line.
 
Upvote 0
George Bernard Shaw again, and with a non sequitur. Why does progress depend on either? If you want to do willy waving with quotes why not attribute them and have them pertinent?

Freedom of speech is not an absolute and the limits on it are debatable and move. But to give an inch to those who want to censor it by threatening and committing murder and/or violence is foolish and cowardly.

You could of course use the argument that to be that insulting is to call down violence upon us. I don't believe this, just as I don't believe that the skimpily dressed girl is calling out to be raped. Do you? Believe she is calling out to be raped? Isn't that where your argument leads?

Lastly, remind me: when did Brits go ape about this Charlie Hebdo cover?



We probably laughed. I did.
 
Upvote 0
If you want to live in a free country the freedom of the press is the number one priority. It is the very first line to be drawn in the sand.

(I wonder how many who comment here have read the Koran from cover to cover? I also wonder how many of our leaders, police and security chiefs have read and understood the Koran. )
 
Upvote 0
If you want to live in a free country the freedom of the press is the number one priority. It is the very first line to be drawn in the sand.

I agree. But freedom of speech is not absolute and we have laws restricting it for good reason. You are also free to throw petrol on a fire but there will be consequences for doing so. Was it really necessary to draw the original cartoons? Couldn't they have made the point that Islam has at it's core some really dangerous and disgusting ideas - such as jihad, martyrdom, apostacy killings, subjugation of women, honour killings etc without doing the one thing that would provoke the whole Muslim community and give the murdering extremists their excuse to spread their vileness?

(I wonder how many who comment here have read the Koran from cover to cover? I also wonder how many of our leaders, police and security chiefs have read and understood the Koran. )

Some of it and some of the Hadith. With the exception of Jihad, the Christian Old Testament is at least as violent and as disgusting a document.
 
Upvote 0
A point not mentioned is the cultural difference between French and Anglo-Saxon political cartooning. France has a long tradition of bad taste, satirical cartooning, (priests with erections appear in the 18th century, a courtier with a giant, 20 metre todger pissing on Paris in a similar age) and often have been scatological.

Our satirical political cartooning is gentler, less confrontational, perhaps even more nuanced, (Steve Bell, nuanced?), and thus acceptable in our eyes. (It has changed; Swift's "A Modest Proposal" would cause a mass Twitter fainting fit now).

Culturally the Charlie Hebdo cartoons are more acceptable in mainstream French culture than they are here, which is perhaps why we are puzzled at the defence of such crass statements. However we need to understand different cultures to help us get on with them....

"without doing the one thing that would provoke the whole Muslim community" Interesting that the whole community can be provoked in one monolithic block. I have heard others defend the religion on the grounds that it is a varied and diverse group which cannot be blamed as a whole.
 
Upvote 0
Was it really necessary to draw the original cartoons?

Of course it was. Why would an aethiest not ridicule all religions? Look up the story surrounding the original cartoons and you will see that it was an exercise in finding out if a chill factor operated on cartoonists.
 
Upvote 0
A point not mentioned is the cultural difference between French and Anglo-Saxon political cartooning. France has a long tradition of bad taste, satirical cartooning, (priests with erections appear in the 18th century, a courtier with a giant, 20 metre todger pissing on Paris in a similar age) and often have been scatological.

Sure.

"without doing the one thing that would provoke the whole Muslim community"
Interesting that the whole community can be provoked in one monolithic block. I have heard others defend the religion on the grounds that it is a varied and diverse group which cannot be blamed as a whole.

Insulting the Prophet is the one thing guaranteed to get all Muslims p1ssed with you. Of course very, very few Westerised Muslims would claim that you should be killed for it but they would understand why you might be killed by others for it and why even moderate Muslims here equivocate over it. In the non-Western world hundreds of millions of Muslims would actually agree with these murders.

We really shouldn't be naive about these beliefs.
 
Upvote 0
Of course it was. Why would an aethiest not ridicule all religions? Look up the story surrounding the original cartoons and you will see that it was an exercise in finding out if a chill factor operated on cartoonists.

Then they found their answer didn't they? Did this progress freedom of speech or harm it do you think? They have the right to insult, of course. But what result did they expect?
 
Upvote 0
There are lots of Muslims taking to social media saying they don't give a stuff about people "insulting" their prophet.

Thinking of 'Muslims' as a unified block is wrong, is patronising and is strange. Are Christians to be treated as a unified block in some instances? Hindus? Buddhists? Atheists? White people, black people: which vast groups are unified?

There are even some Muslims who don't fit the narrative at all, like the Mayor of Rotterdam:
 
Upvote 0
Just seen my link above doesn't work because the nanny filter can't do the f word. Click the link and where there are 4 asterisks put in - k, f, u, c, - (in another order).

Ironic that an amazingly common word is censored in a thread about freedom of speech. Lots of people have had their 'I'm Offended' glands enlarged I suppose...
 
Upvote 0
There are lots of Muslims taking to social media saying they don't give a stuff about people "insulting" their prophet.

Of course there are. But the vast - and I mean the overwhelming - majority of Muslims do not think this way.

Thinking of 'Muslims' as a unified block is wrong, is patronising and is strange.

Muslims are are a unified block in that they all believe in Mohammed. I agree it's strange, but there you go. Below that definitive distinction there are multitudes of diferences between beliefs which is why there are wars between Sunni and Shiites to name but the obvious.

Are Christians to be treated as a unified block in some instances? Hindus? Buddhists? Atheists? White people, black people: which vast groups are unified?

Christians are a unified block in that they all believe in Christ. After that they all tend to believe different stuff. And like Muslims, there's a tried and tested way of annoying them all if you wish to. The difference is that Christianity has been pacified and no longer burns heretics and apostates at the stake.

There are even some Muslims who don't fit the narrative at all, like the Mayor of Rotterdam:

You will find that Muslims who don't believe in Mohammed will be in a very small minority and tend to be called 'not true Muslims' by those who do and find themselves on the wrong side of Jihad.

I sort of get your point, but it's overstretched and I feel that you are trying too hard to shrug off an obvious point - this religion - like all of them - is primitive but is also unreformed and is extreemly dangerous.
 
Upvote 0
OK so you like quotes:

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

.

That seems quite apt.

We have adapted and can generally get on with life in most of the world - "The reasonable man"
Whereas Muslims still seem hell-bent on converting every remaining non-believer into a follower of Islam or simply killing them - "the unreasonable man"

Some people are far too easily offended.

Sticks and stones.......
 
Upvote 0
That seems quite apt.

We have adapted and can generally get on with life in most of the world - "The reasonable man"
Whereas Muslims still seem hell-bent on converting every remaining non-believer into a follower of Islam or simply killing them - "the unreasonable man"

Some people are far too easily offended.

Sticks and stones.......

How is it that the reasonable man has managed to kill so many unreasonable civillians.:rolleyes:

I can see a slight problem with all this reasonableness.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24547256
 
Upvote 0
How is it that the reasonable man has managed to kill so many unreasonable civillians.:rolleyes:

I can see a slight problem with all this reasonableness.

Errr,

In the 20th century alone...

1. Muslim Turkey has expelled approximately 1,500,000 Greeks from its empire in the east and replaced them with Turks. They have massacred approximately 2 million Armenians and replaced them with Turks in the west.

2. Muslim Turkey has invaded and occupied northern Cyprus, displacing the Greeks living there.

3. Muslim northern Sudan has conquered much of southern Sudan, literally enslaving its Christian and pagan population.

4. Indonesian imperialism has occupied all of non-Islamic western New Guinea and incorporated into Indonesia.

5. Muslim Indonesia has invaded and conquered Christian East Timor with horrible loss of life.

6. This very day, Muslim Indonesia is attempting to destroy Christianity in what used to be called the Celebes.

7. A half-dozen Arab countries have fought two to four wars (depending how you count) in an attempt to destroy Israel and occupy its territory, and is currently continuing the attempt this very day with the publicly voted consent of 55 of the world's 57 Islamic nations.

8. For no good reason, Muslim Libya has blown up western aircraft, killing many civilians.

9. Muslim Iraq, in an imperialist war of aggression, invaded and occupied Muslim Kuwait.

10. Muslim Iraq, in an imperialist act of aggression, invaded Muslim Iran with a resulting (some estimates say) death of 2 million people.

11. Muslim Albania, this very minute, is attempting to enlarge its borders at Christian Macedonia's expense.

12. Muslim Northern Nigeria has been (and is currently) an aggressor against the Christian south.

13. Muslims expelled approximately 800,000 Jews from their homelands between 1947 and 1955.

14. During Jordan's occupation of the West Bank, the kingdom undertook an unsuccessful attempt to make Jerusalem a Muslim city by forcing out approximately 10,000 Christian inhabitants.

Who's unreasonable????
 
  • Like
Reactions: MOIC
Upvote 0
Errr,

In the 20th century alone...

1. Muslim Turkey has expelled approximately 1,500,000 Greeks from its empire in the east and replaced them with Turks. They have massacred approximately 2 million Armenians and replaced them with Turks in the west.

2. Muslim Turkey has invaded and occupied northern Cyprus, displacing the Greeks living there.

3. Muslim northern Sudan has conquered much of southern Sudan, literally enslaving its Christian and pagan population.

4. Indonesian imperialism has occupied all of non-Islamic western New Guinea and incorporated into Indonesia.

5. Muslim Indonesia has invaded and conquered Christian East Timor with horrible loss of life.

6. This very day, Muslim Indonesia is attempting to destroy Christianity in what used to be called the Celebes.

7. A half-dozen Arab countries have fought two to four wars (depending how you count) in an attempt to destroy Israel and occupy its territory, and is currently continuing the attempt this very day with the publicly voted consent of 55 of the world's 57 Islamic nations.

8. For no good reason, Muslim Libya has blown up western aircraft, killing many civilians.

9. Muslim Iraq, in an imperialist war of aggression, invaded and occupied Muslim Kuwait.

10. Muslim Iraq, in an imperialist act of aggression, invaded Muslim Iran with a resulting (some estimates say) death of 2 million people.

11. Muslim Albania, this very minute, is attempting to enlarge its borders at Christian Macedonia's expense.

12. Muslim Northern Nigeria has been (and is currently) an aggressor against the Christian south.

13. Muslims expelled approximately 800,000 Jews from their homelands between 1947 and 1955.

14. During Jordan's occupation of the West Bank, the kingdom undertook an unsuccessful attempt to make Jerusalem a Muslim city by forcing out approximately 10,000 Christian inhabitants.

Who's unreasonable????


Don't come close to the 100 million plus slaughtered by the reasonable people.;)
 
Upvote 0

Latest Articles